Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!

The word "Ultimate" can mean different things to different people - but the principle is easy to understand.

As enthusiasts, we have been accustomed to routinely having home theaters that better the experience found in regular movie theaters, at least for 2D presentations. Now that 3D is becoming more common, is it possible to build a 3D system for the home that betters what you can find in the commercial theaters? The answer is a resounding YES!

After considering my goals, I tested various methods of achieving this, and benchmarked variables such as lenses and screens, to come up with EASY and less expensive ways to MATCH what is commercially available, as well as more pricey systems to BLOW AWAY what is available in commercial theaters.

At Cedia this year, we saw various 3D solutions which ranged from nigh-on prefect, at $70,000 to $125,000, to various slightly compromised solutions from $4,000 to $15,000.

The new LG CF3D projector was a very nice concept, at $15,000. It packed, essentially, two projectors into one unit, each projecting the left and right light simultaneously, using circular polarisation. However, it suffered, in my view at CEDIA 2010, by not having very good Contrast Ratios in either 3D or 2D modes - something that is not acceptable to me. Also, even with the very best silver screen, ghosting can still be detected at times, due to the nature of circular polarisation, which is a beast to maintain adequately. You can beat this LG system in quality VERY easily by using two cheap DLP projectors, a pair of Optoma 3DXL boxes, and linear filters.

Other systems by JVC, Sony and others, used active shutter systems - flickering the left and right vews, and having active glasses to view them. When I saw these new systems at CEDIA, I was immediately struck by how dark they were in 3D mode, and how some of them suffered from obvious image flickering, which I found too distracting to the enjoyment of the films in 3D mode.

Moreover, all the systems I saw suffered from the typical 24p stutter in fast motion, when showing Bluray 3D. This is typical of all film-based 24 frame per second content. In 2D films it can be tolerable, but in 3D, your mind rips it to pieces as just being wrong and unreal. This is one reason why the ultimate 3D system must include frame interpolation.

When I ran into the Optoma stand at the show, and saw their new 3DXL box, I knew IMMEDIATELY that I could better all of what I had seen, even perhaps match some of the $70,000 systems I had seen at the show. The Optoma 3DXL lets you take a 3D video input, from various formats such as Bluray 3D and DirecTV, and send it to a DLP-Link 3D projector. HOWEVER, when you use two 3DXL boxes, they split these 3D formats into two streams for the left and right eye, and send them to a dual-projector setup, such as the one I visualized.

I had to do it...

A quick primer on 3D systems:

The 3D you see in theaters is typically "passive 3D", that is, you wear a pair of cheap passive glasses, and the light on the screen is polarised, so that the glasses filter the appropriate "side" of the image for your left and right eye. In the theaters, there are basically two ways this is done; the first is using two projectors that are always on, with a separate filter on each projector, and the second is by using one projector and placing an electronic polariser over the lense, which switches back and forth rapidly between the two polarised states, while the projector "flashes" the alternate eye views. This happens so fast, that you are not supposed to see the flickering.

"Active" 3D systems, which you more typically see in the home, uses electronic glasses that open and close each eye while the TV or projector switches images.

Problems with existing systems, particularly in context of home theater:

There are various problems associated with the systems used both in commercial theaters, and in home 3D systems. First, active shutter systems are prone to "crosstalk" or "ghosting" - even the best systems will still show this problem. When I first viewed Avatar 3D on my Panasonic plasma 3D TV, I was surprised to see crosstalk quite regularly in dark scenes with bright objects. And the Panasonic system is arguably the best active 3D system for TV sets - LCD have bigger crosstalk issues than the Panasonic system. Another issue with active shutter is flickering - something that some folks are certainly more sensitive to than others. Another issue is the comfort of the relatively heavy active shutter glasses, and also the cost - usually over $100 per unit. Finally, by flickering between eyes, particularly in a projector application, active shutter systems can routinely "kill" 60% to 70% of the available light, making the images dark and difficult to enjoy.

So I prefer a passive 3D system, but what are the pitfalls of passive systems? In applications where there is a single projector with a switching electronic polariser, one can experience similar issues with light and flickering, athough, commercial systems tend to oscillate at 140 hz, to fast to perceive the switching. Also, within the passive "space", there are three major technologies used: "Linear" Polarisation (typical of IMAX), "Circular" Polarisation (typical of RealD) and a third system, the Infitec color filter system (used by Dolby 3D). Linear polarisation has the best extinction ratio of the two polarised systems, and hence the best image quality, but is subject to reduced extinction ratios when the viewer tilts their head too much. However, I found that Circular had such poor extinction ratios that Linear was still only equivalent to Circular with someone tilted their head, not really worse. Also, Linear polarisation is MUCH easier for a screen to retain than Circular, allowing a greater selection of screens to choose from, and allowing a more flexible system which can be used more easily and satisfactorily with regular 2D content as well.

Although Circular polarised systems will suffer more ghosting than linear, RealD makes it work beautifully in commercial theaters by preprocessing the video to estimate where they will have extinction issues, and applying "corrections" to the video to offset these, resulting to the viewer not perceiving it. Very smart stuff, but not suitable or available for a home theater at this time. However, pretty much all movie theater passive systems I have seen are still based on 24p film, and even when they are double or quadruple-flashed, the motion breakup in fast movement is VERY apparent to your brain. Again, this is something we can better in our "ultimate" system.

With polarised systems in general, the light loss situation can be "bad" or "good", depending on the light output from the projector you choose to use. DLP projectors can be less expensive, and can be very bright, but their light is usually non-polarised. This means that when they are shot through polarised lenses, and then your passive glasses, you will typically lose a little more than half the light output. Projectors such as DiLA or SXRD are typically pre-polarised. This actually works out very well with polarised lenses, as you can end up retaining over 80% of the light output, if you match a particular system with the appropriate choice of filter system. Be aware that you MUST test the light output of any projector you are considering for a passive system, as some LCD and DiLA projectors have some of the colors polarised at an opposing angle to the other colors (ie some Sony projectors) and CANNOT be used in a polarised system at all.

The Infitec system is not currently suitable for attempting to implement in a home theater - at this time. It will lose over 90% of the light output of the projector, and requires special commercial color processing systems to pre-alter the video fed to each projector, to compensate for the very significant color distortions caused by the lenses.

THIS THREAD, is for anyone interested in the subject, to add their thoughts, experiences, and also source materials they have found.

At this point in time - the system I am visualizing will result in a 3D home theater with the following attributes:
(1) A discrete two projector "passive" 3D system, which allows the use of cheap, "passive" theater-style glasses, rather than expensive "active" shutter glasses.
(2) Light output of 96 hz or 120 hz per eye (depending on content) rather than 24 hz, 48 hz or 60 hz of most existing solutions
(3) Frame Interpolated output for each eye, resulting in a higher TRUE frame rate for each eye than source 3D material commonly available. One of the bigest bugbears I have with 3D films now is that a low frame rate is more disruptive to immersion in 3D than in 2D.
(4) A system that will handle all available 3D formats, not be restricted to a particular set of standards of the particular projector used.
(5) A system that will allow you to use regular non-3D projectors, even of disimilar resolutions, to make the 3D theater.
(6) System that allows use of picture enhancement technology that is not currently available for 3D use. For instance, I plan on intergrating two DarbeeVision boxes to enhance the 3D impact.

As they said in Inception "You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger".

This thread will allow us to share findings of practical implementations that all sound good in theory, but are risky to invest money in without proof of concepts. Also, it will help show which systems can work, or not work, in a set up.

Ultimately - (1) I will build at least TWO different systems here, one based on linear polarisation, one based on circular polarisation. (2) I will have tests linked showing comparative performance of various glasses and screens used with each solution,. (3) I will be able to recommend a combination for each that gives the best tested results - hence making it easy for anyone to confidently set forth and create their own system.

(NOTE - February 7th, 2011 - after doing side by side testing of circular and linear implementations with my dual-projector RS40s I have come to the informed conclusion that circular is not the way to go for a home implementation, whether home-built, or a commercially available system. Circular polarisation is just to delicate and difficult to maintain in the context of a screen which must also double as a 2D screen. If a commercial solution comes along down the road that does real-time image analysis, to compensate for the ghosting that is inherent to circular polarisation, this may change, but we are not there yet, I fear).

- So, in light of the above, I will now focus on building two Linear systems, one being the "Ultimate 3D projection system" using two JVC RS40 projectors with Frame Interpolation enabled, and superior contrast ratios, and the other being two less expensive DLP projectors, without the benefit of Frame Interpolation. Both systems will perform admirably, and will outperform anything available under $15 K, but may also exceed what you are seeing in many theaters. In particular, the RS40-based system will blow away almost anything else you've ever seen in almost every respect.

I'll discuss how you can build your own system - it's very doable - and this thread will show you how easy it is, as well as guide you in finding the parts and putting them together correctly. I have deliberately tested the "right" ways, as well as the "wrong" ways, so that I can speak intelligently and confidently about my choices, and what they mean to you.

For instance, for some polarising lense kits, the internal polarisation of a particular projector might have a negative impact on final light output. So one of the things I propose that we post here, are our own objective tests on the equipment that we already own, so that this can be shared with others and help in their decision-making.

Another thing that can be posted is WHERE to source some of the parts that can be helpful to creating a system of our own, as a resource to others with the same interest.

Another, might be other processing, or add-on equipment that might be useful in improving the final solution.

Finally, of course, there will be the personal experiences of those who have ventured forth and built one system or another - what worked for them, what didn't, what was the overall result.

I've reserved a few posts below this, which I intend to use as repositories or summaries of some of the knowledge and equipment which may appear in the thread later on...

LIGHT READING:

If you are planning to build a dual projector 3D system, you do not necessarily NEED to become an expert in all these optical "thingies", as I will try to give you easy to replicate systems that I will build and test here.

However, if you still want to try to understand what is happening to make these systems work, I will be linking any relevant documents I run into, here, for your perusal.

So you say, "give me an example of what dream 3D systems we're talking about here"?

For me, as an example, my current dream 3D system would be a single-lens, dual projection system, six-DiLA system like the LG, but with 50,000:1 CR, sharp 2D *and* 3D picture quality, dual-channel frame interpolation for 3D Bluray content, and a perceptual contrast enhancement solution to make the 3D effect even greater.

It doesn't exist....

So, what if I took TWO fantastic 2D projectors (such as the new JVC RS250 - X3/RS40 - X7/RS50 units) and combined them? (For that matter, this system could also be built with inexpensive business projectors too, if you didn't require frame interpolation, or certain key CR performance specs).

I find that "passive" 3D (like RealD or IMAX) is more comfortable to watch than the "active" (shutter glasses) systems. Active shutter systems can lose a lot of light, and can also suffer from flickering. Plus I have lots of kids and friends, and don't want to replace tons of expensive glasses.

(EDIT: later, after starting this thread, I read about Runco's D-73 3D dual-projector system, which is, in principal, very similar to what we are discussion here. I made a post about it on the next page - starting price $49,000. What we are doing here, could be done at a 1/4 of that price using the new JVC projectors, or even far less than that, using other cheaper projectors, for instance the JVC 250, at $3,000)

1) So, first we need to source the polarising lenses needed. We would need 1 lense for each of the projectors, to "code" the left and right images, so that they are only seen by the correct eye, when you put the RealD glasses on. Whatever sources I find will be listed in the "Sources" section, below.

2) This would require an up-front 3D processor that could separate the left and right video channels and output them separately to the two projectors. Such a product exists, in the new Optoma 3D-XL box that was demoed at Cedia. Excellent, then lets put that on the potential parts list, below. As more become known that can perform this function, I will add them also.

3) For number (2) above, two of the Optoma 3D-XL boxes would be needed (one for each video channel) and they would both need to be fed the full 3D stream by an HDMI splitter. So, let's list all the compatible splitters we can think of.

4) Polarising the images from each projector can change the color characteristics on some models, depending on their own internal polarisation. So we may need some gear to make adjustments to the color of the signal being fed to the projectors, if they don't already have color management. So we list options for that too (in the case of the JVC RS50, of course, the CMS system on-board can handle this, so no outboard color system would be necessary)

5) Polarised systems require reflective silver based screens, to preserve the polarity of the reflected image and maintain the 3D effect. So we could list appropriate screens here as well, as well as out own personal experience with them. For example, I intend to use the Black Diamond II screen that I already have at home, as it is supposed to be compatible. (update Jan 11, 2011 - turns out the BD II only preserves Linear, not circular. They have a new 3D version in development which preserves circular also. In the meantime, I've ordered an alternate screen for the testing of the circular polarised version of this system.)

For Circular, RealD glasses are readily available on Amazon, very cheaply.
For Linear, look for glasses set at the standard 135 degree, and 45 degrees, mountings. I like these ones here at this link. They are just $2.75 each for 10 pairs. They are like a linear version of the RealD glasses, in a plastic frame with folding arms. http://the3dmarket.myshopify.com/pro...-black-folding

AND - I found another source for Linear Polarised filters, suitable for non-polarised projectors, such as DLP. At $95 for the pair, they are not as cheap as polarization.com, but a nice large size. In this application, you would simply mount each lense at the appropriate 45 degree and 135 degree angle required for your glasses. Job done. As is normal with unpolarised light sources, you would lose about half the light output of the projector. http://the3dmarket.myshopify.com/pro...arized-filters
ALSO - They carry an anti-reflective glass-mounted Circular Polarising lens kit here - http://the3dmarket.myshopify.com/pro...ection-filters
At just $385, these are a normal 0 degree pair, suitable for a projector whose polarisation of all colors is at 90 degrees vertical (not for mine, sadly).

I came across a very cheap source, in the meantime, which I have now received. They are not of the same quality, as they are not mounted in glass, which is preferable, but I hope to use them until the better lenses arrive.http://www.polarization.com/polarsho...x.php?cPath=22
Note - in the initial optical tests, these cheap filters performed incredibly well, frankly.

A quick word regarding the difference between the "cheapies" and the high-quality options:

Filters that are glass-mounted will be better protected from heat damage and will last longer. I do not know what the difference in "lifetime" is, but I do know that the glass-mounted filters are typically rated to last 1000 hours. This means that you WILL be replacing them at some point. If the regular plastic ones last half as long, but cost 1/10th (typical cost difference I see) then one is tempted to go cheap and replace more often.

But there is more to it than that. In cases such as ours, we need to rotate the existing linear polarisation to produce the required linear polarisation, for both the linear and circular solutions we are building here. While this CAN be accomplished by buying the cheaper components and combining them, the air-spaces between the different films required will create potential additional reflections and interferometry that will be detrimental to the image quality. The high-end solutions are far superior in this regard, as their layers are chemically bonded, removing these detrimental effects.

In short, you will get a visibly superior image with the higher quality parts. To some, this will be more important than the difference in lifetime, or replacement costs

http://www.eecolor.com - eeColor Systems are color management systems you can place in-line to projector to compensate for changes to the display after filtering, if your projector cannot do it itself. They are also about to incorporate Darbee Vision in an upcoming product they are releasing soon.

So... how about existing LCD and LCoS projectors out there? Which ones have all three colors polarized at the same angle? Which colors are different?

It's easy to discern this and report back here.

Go into your projector's menu and select the test screens - run each one, the Red, the Green and the Blue, in turn and hold a pair of polarised sunglasses in front of you and slowly rotate it clockwise, while looking through one of the lenses at the front of the projector (don't look directly into the projector lense! You only have two eyes, you need them! )

Note at which angles you are holding the glasses at when the light appears dimmest and brightest for each color. Are the all the same, or is one of them about 90 degrees different to the other two?

Then make a post here with your observations... ESPECIALLY if they are the same.

NOTE!!! (Jan 31, 2011) I realized today, that no matter WHAT angle your projector is polarised, you can easily do a linear OR circular polarised setup, as long as all colors are the same angle, or not polarised at all. This is because you can use a "halfwave plate" filter to "rotate" the polarisation to pretty much any angle desired. Sweeet... And in the case of "pre-polarised" projectors like the JVC, these systems can be implemented with almost no discernable light loss.

You will need a pair of circular polarised glasses for this (such as RealD movie glasses), as well as a pair of linear polarised glasses. These are both readily available online or at Amazon.com.

1) Point your projector at your screen as normal and display an all white screen, either from a test pattern, or by freeze-framing a TV recording, if necessary (Needless to say, never look directly into the projector lense while you are performaing these tests - the glasses should simply be held up in the light path for these tests to allow light to pass thru them, not worn).

You CAN use any screen for this test, no silver screen is needed, because you are holding the glasses in the light path BEFORE the light hits the screen surface, so polarity is not disturbed by the surface.

2) Hold the circular polarised glasses in the light path, about a foot away from the projector lens, with the FRONT of the glasses facing the projector (ie, INSTEAD of facing the screen, as you would normally wear them). You are looking for blockage of more light in one side of the glasses versus the other, to determine if there is any circular polarisation.

If both left and right look to be similar brightness, then there is no circular polarisation.

3) Hold the linear polarised glasses in the light path, with the front of the glasses facing the SCREEN this time. Rotate them while keeping the lenses flat to the light passing thru them, to notice (a) if one lens or the other goes black at a certain angle, and (b) if so, at what angles.

If the two lenses are just a little grey and don't change as you rotate them, then your projector has NO linear polarisation. If one turns black, as the other goes white, then all three colors are linear polarised at the same angle. Finally if the two lenses change colors as you rotate them, but never go black or white entirely, then you have a complicated situation where your colors are polarised, but at DIFFERING angles to each other (this situation makes your projector unsuitable for this apllication, sadly).

If your projector IS linear polarised, and all colors are at the same angle, you can determine that angle by using a pair of polarised sunglasses. Sunglasses are almost always polarised vertically at 90 degrees, since the sun is coming from above. So if your test with sunglasses shows its DARKEST shadow with the glasses held at a normal horizontal position, then your polarisation is 0 degrees, or horizontal (opposite to the vertical polarisation of the glasses).

EXAMPLE PICTURES OF POLARISATION TESTS:

Below are some attached screen shots of what appeared on the screen for my tests of the RS40. The camera is not taking the shots through the glasses lenses, but rather is just shooting the screen with the image of the shadow from the glasses, which are in the light path.

Note: the linear polarised glasses I got from Amazon were polarised at a 45 degree offset from horizontal and vertical. So "total occlusion" was not at the horizontal and vertical positions, as would be normal.

Yes, this involved a big learning curve for me, in my free time, with long delays between testing cycles, as I revised my needs, or ordered new parts.

BUT - the bright side is that YOU will be able to readily put together my final solutions with high confidence that they will work, and that someone else took care of the pitfalls first.

* Dec 17, 2010 - Denon 4311CI has arrived - will be using to passthru the 3D sources in my upcoming setup
* Dec 22, 2010 - New JVC RS40 has arrived - I will be using this temporarily with an HD 550 until the second RS40 arrives
* Jan 5, 2011 - Have received the "cheapy" circular polarising filters for the test setup - have been unable to complete an order for the Advisol filter up to this point.... still...
* Jan 13, 2011 - Have received the TWO Optoma 3DXL boxes for the video splitting (Thank you Optoma!) - Also got word from Optoma that in February there will be a firmware update that will enable 1080p24 output on the split left and right channels from 3D Bluray! excellent!
* Jan 13, 2011 - Have work functions this week - so may start putting these all together next week!
* Jan 27, 2011 - Received new firmware from Optoma, allowing 3DXL to output 24p from Bluray 3D sources. Works perfectly.
* Jan 31, 2011 - Sudden realization that I can use a halfwave or "retarder" filter plate to "rotate" the horizontal (0 degree) polarization of the JVC projectors to whatever angle I want. This means that not only can I do a fully "RealD"-style circular polarised system by rotating the JVC's linear component to 90 degrees vertical, but I can also do a proper IMAX-style linear 135/45 degree compatible system with little to no light loss!!

someone mentioned in another thread how on the Sony Pearl, the green panel was in a different polar orientation compared to the other 2 panels. If that is the case it would not work in a dual projector 3D polarized setup i would think. I only mention it just to be careful before you make the full investment of the JVC's as it might have a similar issue.

Also, since LCOS is already polarized, do you really need to add a filter in front of the lens? I know Barco manages away to do it with out the lenses for 2 LCD units since they too are polarized avoiding potential light loss.

In general you cannot simply add external simple polarizing filters to two LCoS or LCD projectors to create a dual projector 3D setup with each projector having the opposite polarization orientation of the other projector.

UPDATE - As Rob has learned, different wave retarder filter can instead be used to create two different polarization orientations from two otherwise identical LCD or LCoS projectors.

I liked SIM2's 3D demo the best. They used two C3X Lumis 3-chip DLP projectors equipped with Infitec filters which precluded the need for a polarized screen. It's costly @ $80K, but it preserved brightness, contrast and resolution/detail and it was very easy on the eyes and brain. They showed a live concert clip of the Black Eyed Peas and you felt like you were part of the audience.

I liked SIM2's 3D demo the best. They used two C3X Lumis 3-chip DLP projectors equipped with Infitec filters which precluded the need for a polarized screen. It's costly @ $80K, but it preserved brightness, contrast and resolution/detail and it was very easy on the eyes and brain. They showed a live concert clip of the Black Eyed Peas and you felt like you were part of the audience.

So it really appears that the only way to use LCoS or LCD projectors in a dual projector 3D setup is to either design-in the display panel's polarizers specifically for this application or to internally modify the projector's light engine to provide the desired poloarization.

Or use the Dolby Digital Cinema glasses that use the Infitec system. No need for a polarizing screen that way either. Pretty much what SIM2 is doing, except they do the filtering internally I believe and have color adjustments for this system.

I already have tried the Dolby glasses with 2 LCOS projectors (and AE4000 and 9500UB), but didn't have any way to drive 3D content to them, so just used test patterns and physically offset the projectors different amounts horizontally to see how much 3D effect showed up.

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

Using just a window pattern with a box in the center of the screen my friend reported that the box looked like it was something like halfway between him and the screen at one point. The distance depended on how much I misconverged the 2 projectors. For me it the popping out effect wasn't nearly as pronounced, but I would like to see it with some actual content.

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

Darinp,
Have you attempted to span a computer desktop across the two projectors?

I did a quick test using media player classic and was able to have side-by-side content playing on both my projector and monitor at the same time. Full screen would not display on both monitors, but I was able to stretch the media player window across the entire desktop and have one side of the video playing on the projector and the other side on the monitor. Might be an interesting test to conduct.

In general you cannot simply add external polarizing filters to two LCoS or LCD projectors to create a dual projector 3D setup with each projector having the opposite polarization orientation of the other projector. This is because both LCoS and LCD light engines incorporate internal polarizing filters for each of the 3 color panels and once the light is polarized internally, external polarizers cannot be used to change the orientation of the polarization to what is necessory for 3D projection (the only exception may be if the internal filters were circular polarizers all of the same orientation and you then use external filters to create linear polarization with different orientations for the two projectors). Also to further complicate matters, tests of one Sony SXRD (LCoS) projector and one one Epson LCD projector have demonstrated that not all 3 of each of these projector's panels have the same polarization. So it really appears that the only way to use LCoS or LCD projectors in a dual projector 3D setup is to either design-in the display panel's polarizers specifically for this application or to internally modify the projector's light engine to provide the desired poloarization. For DLP projectors, which do not require internal polarizers, creating a dual projector 3D setup using external polarizing filters should not have these issues.

In general this is correct. However, there are cases where the internal polarization on LCD/LCOS units can actually be used to the advantage of the 3D filters, allowing them to be more efficient.

The SF-SX21 filters, sold by SilverFabirc above, are actually designed to work with LCD projectors that are already polarized. They are more efficient as a result, and can allow up to 71% of the projector light to pass thru. Their next follow-up lense to this can allow up to 75% of the light, for the same reason.

The trick, ideally, is to find a projector which has all three colors aligned the same. In the case of the Sony example mentioned by mikenificent above, the green polarisation was 90 degrees off of the other two colors. The filters can still work, simply by offsetting them 45 degrees from the pj filters, and 90 degrees off of each other, but they are not as efficient in that case.

I am hoping this thread will allow people to test their own projectors and report back to us here, so we can start to get an idea of how existing and future projectors stack up in this regard, so we can know which projectors are good candidates for this sort of 3D setup.

EDIT! New information Jan 31, 2011 shows that we can rotate the existing linear polarisation of these projectors (using wave retarder filters) to almost any angle we want, meaning we can do linear polarised "IMAX" solutions with litle to no light loss, as well as fully comatible "RealD" style solutions as well

I liked SIM2's 3D demo the best. They used two C3X Lumis 3-chip DLP projectors equipped with Infitec filters which precluded the need for a polarized screen. It's costly @ $80K, but it preserved brightness, contrast and resolution/detail and it was very easy on the eyes and brain. They showed a live concert clip of the Black Eyed Peas and you felt like you were part of the audience.

The Infitec is a great system too, I was checking pricing on these filter... until I found that they can kill 90% of the light.

At Cedia this year, we saw various 3D solutions which ranged from nigh-on prefect, at $70,000 to $125,000, to various slightly compromised solutions from $4,000 to $15,000.

I dont think that accurately reflects the reality at all. They certainly dont range from "nigh-on prefect" down to "slightly compromised". Both are over generous, with the latter being extravagantly so.

In terms of fidelity and immersion, I would say they range from very good to terrible. most being at the lower end of the scale

--------------------------------------------"Wow, do you think you are Adonis"...... "Baby, I'm not A-donis, I'm THE-donis"

I dont think that accurately reflects the reality at all. They certainly dont range from "nigh-on prefect" down to "slightly compromised". Both are over generous, with the latter being extravagantly so.

In terms of fidelity and immersion, I would say they range from very good to terrible. most being at the lower end of the scale

You are probably spot on, but I didn't want anyone thinking I was singling out any one particular solution.

CM. Were you at Cedia? Without being there, you couldn`t know all that was there. Some of it was awful including stuff which will MSRP around $10K. Some very expensive stuff was flawed particularly in their ability to display horizontal motion in 3D without blurring. The best was Cineramax`s. The biggest difference among them all was brightness. 3D just doesn`t do it for me with say ANSI 1300 projectors and then motion blurring thrown in.

The Infitec is a great system too, I was checking pricing on these filter...

The price I paid was about $9. That is $18 for a set of Dolby Digital Cinema glasses, which provided me with 2 filters, one for each projector.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark haflich

Rdjam. You are being optimistic. The Infitec system has a loss of light of 94%.

I wonder how they came up with that number. Like is that for UHP or Xenon? It seems to me that it would completely depend on where the light you had fell on the spectrum, since the way it works is by allow narrow bands of that spectrum through (different bands of R, G, and B for each eye).

With perfect LEDs where each projector had its LEDs at the correct wavelength for it, it seems that an Infitec system could have very low light loss.

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

CM. Were you at Cedia? Without being there, you couldn`t know all that was there.

I dont need to have seen all that was there for my statement to be valid. I was not commenting on the totality of what is available, simply the range of capability.

I have seen 2 of the 3 best systems that were there, and found them, "In terms of fidelity and immersion" to be "very good". I have also seen some of the others that were displayed, and found them to be "terrible". Therefore my comment on the range of performance is valid.

Your own comments would appear echo my sentiments.

--------------------------------------------"Wow, do you think you are Adonis"...... "Baby, I'm not A-donis, I'm THE-donis"

I wasn`t disagreeing with you. Moreover, I have learned the futility of trying to do that although in very rare instances you are wrong but quick to correct yourself.. I was curious to know if you were there. According to my cell phone tracker, yes little brother is always watching you, you were not. Thanks for the confirmation. Don`t worry. I will not tell anybody where you were.

The price I paid was about $9. That is $18 for a set of Dolby Digital Cinema glasses, which provided me with 2 filters, one for each projector.
I wonder how they came up with that number. Like is that for UHP or Xenon? It seems to me that it would completely depend on where the light you had fell on the spectrum, since the way it works is by allow narrow bands of that spectrum through (different bands of R, G, and B for each eye).

With perfect LEDs where each projector had its LEDs at the correct wavelength for it, it seems that an Infitec system could have very low light loss.

--Darin

Mark's number of 94% is pretty accurate.

I've seen some users that took the glasses lenses out and placed them over the projector lenses, but this is not a workable solution - the colors are affected differently to how the proper projector lenses work, as the glasses are designed to allow, not block, certain light frequencies. Also the glasses do not block enough of the non-allowed light to make a clean separation, and you get a lot of ghosting, because of all the extra light that passes.

You definitely need light cannons for the Infitec system.

Edit: Feb 1st, 2011 - Infitec are announcing new lenses today, apparently. Uncertain what that will mean to performance, but it'll be interesting to watch.

I just got home and tested the output of the HD550 I have here, with my Maui Jims, and ALL the colors are polarised together at zero degrees. This makes it a very good candidate for the low-loss SPAR lenses linked above!

... as the glasses are designed to allow, not block, certain light frequencies.

My assumption has been that the glasses would block all relevant frequencies that are not meant to be seen and only allow things through that were meant to go through (other than that there is always some leakage). Are you saying that filters designed to go in the projector block frequencies that the glasses don't block and if so, I'm curious if you have a source with an explanation of what those are.

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."